The late comedian George Carlin once wrote that you never see a smiling runner. Blissed-out veterans of the 聽craze may beg to differ, but Carlin鈥檚 observation is corroborated somewhat by the findings of a 聽that was published this summer, entitled 鈥淭hink aloud: an examination of distance runners鈥 thought processes.鈥 The study, which required test subjects to verbalize everything that passed through their minds as they ran, found that 32 percent of all thoughts fell under the theme of 鈥淧ain and Discomfort.鈥 Given that response, it鈥檚 no wonder so many runners look less like they鈥檙e in a state of endorphin-induced 鈥渞unner鈥檚 high,鈥 and more like they鈥檙e enduring a severe bout of indigestion.聽
But considering the fact, as the study notes in its introduction, that over half a million Americans participate in (and presumably train for) marathons every year, running can鈥檛 only be about subjecting oneself to various forms of unpleasantness. Along with Pain and Discomfort, researchers identified two other categories that describe what runners think about while on the move. The majority (40 percent) of thoughts were concerned with matters of 鈥淧ace and Distance,鈥 e.g. 鈥7:30 [mins per mile] feel good but it's flat, just wait for that hill.鈥 Finally, 28 percent of runners鈥 thoughts were focused on the external 鈥淓nvironment,鈥 鈥Is that a rabbit at the end road? Oh yeah how cute.鈥
The study鈥檚 authors note that while there have been past attempts to understand the thought processes of runners, the majority of these experiments took the questionable approach of relying on runners鈥 ability to remember what they thought about after they鈥檇 finished exercising. Hence, 鈥渢here remains a lack of literature attempting to measure thought processes in real time during athletic practice/training . . . [but] a promising methodology for closing this gap in the literature lies within the use of the think-aloud protocol.鈥
Here鈥檚 how this 鈥減romising methodology鈥 was applied. A sample group of ten runners, six men and four women, ages 29 to 52, all of whom had run a marathon in the past calendar year, were asked to record their thoughts during a 30-minute treadmill session and on a longer outside run. Participants wore small microphones on their shirt collars and recording devices around their waists. They were instructed to run at a 鈥渃onversational鈥 pace, so they would be able to comfortably say what was on their minds. The experiment yielded over 18 hours of recordings.
鈥淥n a normal run, I鈥檒l have harebrained ideas about all different things,鈥 Ben True says. 鈥淲hen I finish the run, shower, and eat, I鈥檒l revisit the idea and realize that it鈥檚 not that good.鈥
When the results of the study were published online in the 鈥淚nternational Journal of Exercise Psychology,鈥 a number of publications, from the 聽to the , seized upon the apparent revelation that much of what runners think about on runs is how miserable running makes them feel. Or, : 鈥淲hat runners think about: How much running sucks.鈥
Upon closer inspection, however, a few aspects of the 聽鈥淭hink Aloud鈥 study seem questionable. Ten people is a tiny sample size鈥攏ot nearly enough to make any larger, conclusive statements about the mind games of marathoners. And though the study鈥檚 participants were instructed not to censor anything and just blurt out whatever crossed their minds as they ran, the very process of articulation, coupled with an awareness that someone will be eventually be listening in, make a genuinely unfiltered rendering of thought processes impossible.聽
In fairness to the authors of the study, this latter point is addressed, albeit very briefly, in the 鈥淒iscussion鈥 of the results section of the report:
鈥淎dditionally, although participants were requested to 鈥榲erbalise everything that passes through your head鈥, they may not have shared certain thoughts for various reasons.鈥
As to the thoughts that they did choose to share, something struck me as rather bizarre when I related the results of the study to my own experience as a runner. While I can confirm that all three categories鈥揚ain and Discomfort, Pace and Distance, Environment鈥揳re applicable to the kinds of things I think about when I run, I can say with confidence that the majority of my thoughts fall outside this neatly defined rubric. Yes, I think about pace and my ailing ankle every time I go out, but most of the time I鈥檓 concerned with everyday banalities that, at least as far as I can tell, have little to do with running.聽
I don鈥檛 think I鈥檓 alone here.聽
Just to be sure, I reached out to Boston Marathon 5k winner Ben True, figuring that if anyone鈥檚 thoughts were likely to be hyper-focused on running, while running, it would be one of the best runners in the world. When I spoke to him, True said that he tries to be very fixed on the task at hand when he鈥檚 in a race, and that sometimes during long solo runs he plays out race scenarios in his mind. When running by himself, however, he was just as likely to be figuring out what he was going to make for lunch. 聽聽
鈥淥n a normal run, I鈥檒l have harebrained ideas about all different things鈥搕hings I want to do later that day, things I want to do in the next five years, planning out my life,鈥 True said. 鈥淥ften, it鈥檚 some new invention that I think would be really cool, some new business plan . . . a lot of these, when I finish the run, shower, and eat, I鈥檒l revisit the idea and realize that it鈥檚 not that good.鈥
If you run, you probably won鈥檛 find this to be much of a surprise. Likely you鈥檝e had your own version of harebrained thoughts and food-specific revelries while clicking off the miles. So why no mention of these in the 鈥淭hink Aloud鈥 experiment?
Dr. Duncan Simpson, one of the study鈥檚 four coauthors, explained that the requirements for publishing the study necessitated a condensed, simplified version of the results, and that much of what runners said was left out in order to present a more coherent paper.
鈥淲e had everything,鈥 Dr. Simpson said. 鈥淲e had people talking about work. We had individuals going off and talking about dates. People talking about all sorts of different things. We did have a miscellaneous category, but it was so broad . . . so some of those miscellaneous findings we didn鈥檛 really talk about.鈥
Given these omissions, it might appear strange that the results of the study were presented in percentages, totaling to 100, which paints a deceptively holistic portrait. Dr. Simpson was quick to clarify that these numbers 鈥渨ere basically the percentages鈥 once he and his fellow researchers had determined the categories under which to present the information. In other words, the percentages don鈥檛 take the miscellaneous category into account at all.
鈥淭he percentages were not something we really wanted to have and were particularly comfortable with doing because we couldn鈥檛 use all the data,鈥 Simpson said, explaining that there was considerable pressure to present 鈥渕ore quantifiable figures.鈥澛
Which is a good thing to remember when clicking on a headline claiming that a third of all runners hate running. Turns out that might not actually be the whole story.聽